User talk:Arbington
Hi, welcome to Mass Effect Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Combat (Mass Effect 2) page. Be sure to check out our Style Guide and Community Guidelines to help you get started, and please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- SpartHawg948 (Talk) 19:30, June 6, 2010 Eviscerator = Lieberschaft = sword From the weapon's description: "The Lieberschaft 2180 shotgun, or "Eviscerator," is of human civilian design and has a unique ammunition generator", to say that it isn't named after a sword and that that info only belongs on a German wiki is like saying the Katana isn't named after one either. 17:59, August 4, 2010 (UTC) :A lieberschaft is a sword, but an eviscerator isn't. The Eviscerator trivia you added could be placed better on the German Mass Effect wiki, where it might be better recognized as the Lieberschaft. As for the Katana comment, the gun is actually refered to as the katana, and thus, this would count more as trivia, but I know of no one who refers to the Eviscerator as the Lieberschaft. Again, maybe on the German wiki, but no one here refers to it as such, at least, that I know of. Arbington 18:15, August 4, 2010 (UTC) ::Sorry to jump in here, but in English Evisceration, which is probably what the Eviscerator gets its name from, means to remove the internal organs, or visceria, especially from the abdominal cavity. See Evisceration, which the M-22 does seem to do so quite well IMO. However it does not mean a sword becuase Lieberschaft is likely the manufacturer of the Eviscerator, not an alternate name of it. Also just to note that I'm almost certain that we don't have dev confirmation on the rest being named for swords so I have modified the trivia appropiately. Also putting trivia that the Geth Shotgun and the Eviscerator aren't named after such isn't trivia either. Lancer1289 18:54, August 4, 2010 (UTC) :::Well... some are actually named after swords. The Scimitar, Katana, and Claymore are all types of sword. Might not be trivia, but it is true. I don't know if dev confirmation is needed for this one. Arbington 19:01, August 4, 2010 (UTC) ::::Well we need dev confirmation on anything. We had an argument over the fact that the YMIR, FERNIS, and LOKI mechs were named for Norse gods, which they probably are, but we need dev confirmation on that one too. We have embedded text next to trivia that is dev confirmed, see Turian#Trivia for examples of that. That trivia can be taken as fact, while the rest is likely, and I really hated that Dragon Age debate over the "Creature" statue in Kasumi's Loyalty Mission. While I can also see that it is a reference, we still have to put likely becuase we don't have dev confiration. Does that make sence, I hope it did? :) Lancer1289 19:28, August 4, 2010 (UTC) :It makes perfect sense, and I can see how that might get annoying after a discussion or two. So many obvious references, yet so few are confirmed. Next thing you know, we'll need confirmation to put that Wrex is a krogan! No, I can see why this rule is in place, and frankly, it is quite important. If people could just add information all willy-nilly, we'd have more speculation then actual info. Better to confirm the info, and sort through the rest. Arbington 19:41, August 4, 2010 (UTC) Pics with Shepard in them Please note that due to continality issues, we do not accept images with Shepard in them. Please see our style guide, and the section on Shepard and Gender. Because BioWare has not established a canon gender for Shepard, we don't accept images with Sheaprd in them. Thanks. Lancer1289 19:55, June 6, 2010 (UTC) Policy Forum I don't know whether or not you have noticed but there is currently a proposal to establish a new forum where policy for the ME Wiki can be debated and voted on. The forum would allow anyone to bring to a policy question to the attention of the community and we could use some input. Take a look at the proposal on the Forum:Policy Forum page. Thanks in advance. Lancer1289 02:41, July 12, 2010 (UTC) REPARZ!!1!11!! Got it here. It's a very early piece of concept art of the galactic core area that the Omega 4 Relay spits you into. Compared to that, what we actually get is a little underwhelming in retrospect. -- Commdor (Talk) 03:49, July 29, 2010 (UTC) :Underwhelming indeed. There is a profound lack of Reapers in that debris field. Why there aren't any Reapers in the headquarters of one of their most useful tool-races is something that has somewhat annoyed me. The first time I went through the Omega-4 Relay, I was all psyched up and ready to fight Harbinger. I found more Collectors and a giant robot, in non-spaceship form. In any game other then Mass Effect 2, this would be very anticlimactic, but Bioware still gave us a good final mission by adding the threat of death. A death-threat, if you will. But I digress. Cool picture, dude. Thanks for the source, though I had a secret hope that some Mass Effect 3 related thing had happened that I didn't know about. Arbington 06:27, July 29, 2010 (UTC) Wiki news! Knowing absolutely nothing about the system for displaying blog posts and such, I'm going to assume that, in order for the blog post thingy to work, you need to add a "News" category to your blog post (or any other that's to be added). Probably would require the creation of said category too. Just spitballing here. :D -- Dammej (talk) 05:15, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :I'm asking one of the admins over at the Dragon Age Wiki right now, as they use this system. Hopefully, said admin can help me out a little. If not, you're suggestion sounds reasonable, so I guess I'll try it out. Thanks! Arbington 05:23, August 9, 2010 (UTC) ::Er... It didn't work. An admin on DA Wiki has respondes, though, so I/we should be able to get this ironed out in no time flat! Arbington 05:40, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :::Actually, it looks like it did work. You just have to clear the cache on the page for it to display. -- Dammej (talk) 05:44, August 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::Ah. Sweet. Well, I'm turning in for the night, but I'll make sure everything is worjing perfectly in the morning. Arbington 05:49, August 9, 2010 (UTC) Saw you working on the news blog thing. Trying to one-up me, hmmmm? I will have my revenge! Anywho, wanted to let you know that you don't need to split the news blog system into two sections. The split was designed before you suggestion to use the blog system, so it's already obsolete. Take out the split and you can fit three or four blogs instead of just two, which I think would be preferable. -- Commdor (Talk) 18:25, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :I'm just trying to see if it looks as good as I think it might, and go from there. One-uping you never even crossed my mind once. To quote an unfortunate Spaceball, "Not over your helmet sir, m-more to the side! It'll never happen again, I swear! N-never!" As for the one section thing, that's great, because I was thinking that two seperate section would be somewhat annoying with this system. I shall implement/re-implement/un-implement this whole thing now. Arbington 18:32, August 9, 2010 (UTC) ::(edit conflict)Here's just me saying, which I am clearly in the minority about, but I can see this news system being abused if there isn't some regulation on it, such as only a selected group of users can put offical news blogs. Currently I like the system that we have, as it links to the various articles and appropiate pages, and if this new system is to be implemented, then we need to put some regulation on it. Also I like the two section news as it seperates out the universe news from the wiki news, which helps to pick out important things and keeps them seperate. Lancer1289 18:37, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :(Double edit conflict) Yeah, the whole news split was based on the premise that Wiki-related news items would be few and far between, and thus less likely to be read by users before they were pushed out by newer news about ME stuff. With a split, the Wiki news would stay on the page much longer. With a blog system though, news blogs would get archived, so Wiki news wouldn't necessarily disappear forever. I probably should have told you this sooner, but your eager-beaver-ness caught me off guard. :) At least with you working on this, I can skip ahead to that Codex-tagging system I've been chewing on. -- Commdor (Talk) 18:43, August 9, 2010 (UTC) ::Response to Lancer: Maybe get a group of reliable users, call them news editors or some such, and only let them add news. We could list these news editors somewhere, so if another user wants to add news, he can ask a news editor. The NE would then decide if it's appropriate as news. -- Commdor (Talk) 18:43, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :::(Edit Conficts) Ah. Well, as for regulation, I don't know how we'd do that, because all you do is put a blog in a certain category. On one side, unregistered users can't make blogs, but we might have issues with the occasional vandal. As for the two sections, I really can do whichever. I think that a one section system would be simpler, but two sections is more true to our current system. Arbington 18:47, August 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::I really do think that we need a select group of editors that post news blogs, as anyone can add categories don't forget. I do like Commdor's suggestion, and since they will all be archived I really don't have a problem with one section. However I am still weary about this, and if it is implemented then we do need some regulation and rules reguarding them. I do have a few suggestions on that end, but that's for later. Lancer1289 18:59, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :::I honestly don't see the need for regulation. It apparently works out just fine on the fallout wiki, which is more active than our own. As Arbington points out, unregistered users can't make blogs, which will automatically cut out a lot of vandals. If a vandal does somehow sneak some news onto a page, can't an administrator just delete the blog post and block them? :::This being said, I'm not opposed to a list of "News Editors", but I think we should try it out without any regulation first. If it ends up being a problem, it'll be a simple fix (Adding an tag to the bloglist code will cause the list only to show news posts from that author. Multiple authors can be defined too, so there's that. :::But yeah, I definitely think we should try it in a completely unmoderated system first, and lock it down only if people abuse it. -- Dammej (talk) 19:02, August 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::Glad to hear that you're thinking ahead, these are some really good ideas. The one thing that I really saw as a major issue with this system was a lack of regulation. Really, just about everything is set up. This was way easier then I though it'd be. Arbington 19:07, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :::::I really can't say for certain but I do think there there is probably an unspoken standard for news blogs on the Fallout wiki. Again I really do think that it should be limited to a group, that will be fairly large, that way we can prevent unnecessary blog posts, which are almost garuenteed to happen. Also I can see it happening is someone regesters to pst a blog, then complains when it isn't news worthy. I really don't think the Fallout wiki is complely unrestricted and there probably is a standard, just not posted. Lancer1289 19:14, August 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::::I like the whole "News Group" ideea. It could be easily implemented, and it'll take care of the vandals. Arbington 19:21, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :::::Well, if it's unspoken, then you obviously can't find it anywhere. :) I'm 100% sure that any user on the fallout wiki can make blog posts and stick them in the news category. Looking at the bloglist code they have, nothing is restricted by author (the only way I know of that can restrict which posts get scraped). I think it'll be a snowball effect really. If we post really high quality news posts to start up that section, people will try to mimic it if they have their own news posts to add. Like I said, if it becomes a problem where a bunch of junk posts get made, then we can lock down the system. I have faith that users will make high quality posts for the news section. I'd rather assume that and be disappointed than assume that a user cannot determine if something is news worthy. -- Dammej (talk) 19:25, August 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::::I still think we should at least add something to the Manual of Style stating what is and is not newsworthy. That way, we can at least say we tried if someone does try to spam the news section. Arbington 19:34, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :::::::I think I can get behind that. Perhaps link to that article right before the "add your own news" link. -- Dammej (talk) 19:38, August 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::::I don't have a problem with that either, but we do need some rules about this so people can't argue over what is and isn't news worthy. Lancer1289 19:44, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :::::::Er... whoops. I meant the Community Guidelines, not the Manual of Style, though both would be good. Arbington 19:52, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :::::News = Announcements/press releases/media from BioWare, previews and interviews that feature new and insightful information, announcing the release of games, books, comics, DLC, etc. Not-news = Rumors, speculation, fan websites or blogs, unsubstantiated material from forums, fan-sponsored petitions (i.e. sign here to get character X in ME3, tell BioWare we want helmet toggle and so forth), fan-written opinion pieces and reviews. That should be sufficient framework, we can expand upon it. -- Commdor (Talk) 19:59, August 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::::Sounds good to me. Are there any other problems that anyone sees here? Arbington 20:03, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :::::::Short and to the point, just how I like it. Those should work for now and we can adjust them as we need to. Lancer1289 20:14, August 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::::::So, it appears Lancer thus far approves (as far as I can tell). Anyone else have an issue to bring up? Arbington 20:24, August 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::::Yes. I get terrible heartburn, and Zantac has little or no effect. Is there a more effective non-prescription product I can use? :) -- Commdor (Talk) 20:27, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :::::::(edit conflict)I do, we just needed some rules rather than having it completely unregulated. Mainly so when someone posted a blog and added it to the news category, and then it gets removed, we can just point there for the rules and explain why their blog doesn't meet it. Lancer1289 20:29, August 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::::::And thus, the Community Guidelines would list said rules, such as what Commdor said earlier.Such as "no speculation", "no fan-made material/petitions/sites/etc.", "BioWare announcements, comments, releases, and such are fine", "releases are fine", and rules of that nature. Arbington 20:43, August 9, 2010 (UTC) :::::::::So, is this ready to be put up for voting, or is more discussion required here? Arbington 21:37, August 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::::::::As two hours have passed since I last checked for objections, I guess I'll put this up for voting in the Projects Forum. Arbington 23:46, August 9, 2010 (UTC) Ralok blog How could you????!!!! Spart was so mean and angry with me!!!! Just kidding. From your posts you seem pretty worried this whole ralok thing is gonna get someone in trouble and you'd be blamed. Dont be. you just did at you thought was right. it may not have worked out as you expected, but since when does life ever? If anyone pays for writing insulting comments about Spart, that’s their fault. it not like he wasn’t going to find out about the blog since the whole point of it was for someone to ask him to be more lenient to ralok.--Ironreaper 05:59, September 7, 2010 (UTC) Deadliest Catch From your user page, I'm guessing that you are also a fan of the Crab-Catching series. I don't know if you have been following the news with the show lately, but I'm glad that everything worked out between the Hillstrands, Sig, and Discovery. I felt that if the Time Bandit and Northwestern left, the season after Phil passes, probably would have killed the show. Anyway looking forward to Season Seven and I still need to catch up on some parts of season six. Lancer1289 23:14, October 10, 2010 (UTC) :Indeed. With Phil dead, I couldn't stand the loss of both Sig and the Hillstrands. Glad to see they'll be staying on. Arbington 16:04, October 11, 2010 (UTC) ::Indeed. Lancer1289 16:07, October 11, 2010 (UTC) Request Hey Arbinton, I noticed that you chose to not accept email from other users. So, if you wouldn't mind doing me a favor and at your earliest convenience? It would be much appreciated. Lancer1289 15:51, April 6, 2011 (UTC) :C'mon! You know you want to! SpartHawg948 23:27, April 6, 2011 (UTC) ::Actually, I can totally change that setting. This has never really come up before. I'll send you an email too though. Arbington 23:31, April 6, 2011 (UTC) Congrats! Congratulations to Arbington! He's our newest "senior editor", with rollback rights that enable him to give vandals a metaphorical kick in the teeth! (Or kick in the jimmies, whichever you prefer.) He's joining some illustrious company, but he's sure earned it! So don't mess with this guy... or else!!! (Oh, also, he's a darn fine mediator, if I do say so myself! "Arbington the Arbitrator!) SpartHawg948 05:09, April 7, 2011 (UTC) :Congradulations from me as well, and I do like the nickname. Lancer1289 05:36, April 7, 2011 (UTC) ::Congrats fellow "Spectre" (In the words from our own Council member, Spart)! Heh. — Teugene (Talk) 05:39, April 7, 2011 (UTC) :::Thanks, all of you! I'm proud to be a member of this fine community, and I'll do whatever I can to help it out. From crushing vandals to settling disputes, I'll try my best to help. I'm honored to be given these responsibilities, and I plan to use them wisely. And with that, "It's time do be big goddamn heroes!". Arbington 03:25, April 8, 2011 (UTC) ::Hopefully that will be the case. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 04:32, April 8, 2011 (UTC)